Digital camera sales to top film cameras....

[Dr Mordrid]

Digital sales up....

Dr. Mordrid

[VJ]

It was to be expected, with the continuous release of new models in digital cameras (various manufacturers). Sometimes, I wonder how many people actually "benefit" from the fact that they have made the step to digital cameras: if you only get your storage card to the lab to get the pictures (or a subset) on print and on CD, does it matter that much that the pictures were digital to begin with ? (I can't see my parents to ever have benefits when going digital - on the contrary: with film, you are quite unlikely to run out of "storage space"; the only advantage they would have is that you can review the picture right after shooting (but if you are not used to that ability, you don't really miss it).
Of course, it makes a difference if you put them on your computer first, and perform some additonal post processing prior to have them printed (or print them yourself). So, sometimes I think we (being most of us in the IT sector or having interests there) might have a distorted perception on the "average" amateur photographer.
Major disadvantage is that - depending on the camera - powerfull computers are required; my Nikon D100 provides 12 MB RAW files, which can blow up up to 36 MB TIFF . Really too big for my PII-450 to handle...
(but improvement is on the way )


Jörg

[Dr Mordrid]

I dare say most digital camera owners got them to avoid using commercial labs for family snapshots, if not for cost reasons then out of self defense; mainly because some moron working at a photo lab might pass pictures you take of your kid playing in the tub on the to the local prosecutor

I also think the movies "One Hour Photo", "Manhunter" and its remake "Red Dragon" put a whole new light on film labs as well

Dr. Mordrid

[Wulfman]

Originally posted by Dr Mordrid
I dare say most digital camera owners got them to avoid using commercial labs for family snapshots, if not for cost reasons then out of self defense; mainly because some moron working at a photo lab might pass pictures you take of your kid playing in the tub on the to the local prosecutor

I also think the movies "One Hour Photo", "Manhunter" and its remake "Red Dragon" put a whole new light on film labs as well

Dr. Mordrid

are you serious?

the movies... well, hollywood.

the main-labs are usually highly automated to handle thousands of films they receive daily from all over the country. when I get them at the shop (supermarket) they are sealed. if I get them from the local photo shop (higher quality) the owner breaks the seal in front of me.

and digital cameras: I'm used to cameras with mirror-reflex finder. once the digital versions of these are available for a lower price (<1000€) and can take a picture within 1/10 of a second after I pressed the button I'll buy one.

300 ms delay and more for high end and around 400-500 ms (up to 0,8s) for mid-class is too much for some occasions.

mfg
wulfman

[VJ]

DrMordid: I could be wrong, but I don't think most people here buy digital for that reason. Personally, I have the impression that people here tend to buy digital for their own comfort (immediate review, post processing, ...) but still have their pictures printed in a professional photolab...

Originally posted by Wulfman
and digital cameras: I'm used to cameras with mirror-reflex finder. once the digital versions of these are available for a lower price (<1000€) and can take a picture within 1/10 of a second after I pressed the button I'll buy one.

300 ms delay and more for high end and around 400-500 ms (up to 0,8s) for mid-class is too much for some occasions.

Hmm, you should update your specs :

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/ND100/D10A7.HTM

The Nikon D100 has a shutter lag of 0.1s, the Canon D60 (just a thad slower), Fuji S2pro and probabely the new Canon 10D all have very similar values. The professional models (Nikon D1x/h: 0.072s , Canon 1D) even perform better than that. Only the "point-and-shoot" cameras still suffer from high shutter lag.
But of course, there still is the price, which is more in the €2200-€2700 range (perhaps the upcoming Canon 10D might change that).

(I have the D100, and must say the shutter lag is *very* fast, haven't missed a subject because of this )


Jörg

[Dr Mordrid]

I mentioned the privacy issue because several of my neighbors are worried that some innocent pic of their kids butt in the tub or on a private beach is going to get reported by their drug store and end up throwing some eager-beaver city prosecutor in promotion mode. This has already happened in a couple of smaller cites in western Michigan, stipid as it is

Also; I do use labs since I'm a photographer with my own studio. Mainly I was talking about the other 99% of picture-takers (note the distinction) who are just doing snapshots.

Most of that 99% who also use digital cams are using their printers instead of labs, which is why earnings for film processing is starting to tank. This trend will continue, which is why Kodak laid off all those people and will probably lay off more.

Dr. Mordrid

[The PIT]

Well some schools have tried to ban cameras etc just in case a pervo gets hold of them.

[Wulfman]

Originally posted by VJ

Hmm, you should update your specs :
Jörg

as you said - they fail in the price-category.

mfg
wulfman

[GT98]

One of the big problems that I've run into is that with my HP 960C is that the damn color ink on it runs a small fortune to replace them..amost $50 dollars alone for it. Its not very cost effective to print out alot of photos, though I've used a service like imagestation to make prints for me of my Digital shots when I was in Jamaica and was quite happy with the quality they offered.

[Kurt]

the real cost savig si when you DON'T print the pictures that aren't worth it. Anyway, inkjets are totally incapable of reproducing a decent quality photo, even with the fancy papers at high res (1200dpi +). They look OK, but then the paper degrades after a couple of years... long story short...it's better to have them printed on the new digital booth...

[Stringy]

Yes I agree with Kurt, I've had my Digital Camera for a year and a half and have had many pictures made into prints, and many more I haven't, prolly more than that I deleted within 5 minutes of taking them...
I use Ofoto myself just because of their online photo album, in which I have hundreds of photos online and ready for family to order...

I originally bought the camera because I was expecting my first child and wanted to document it for the relative which all live pretty far away...
Anyways, Only a trained eye can tell them apart and at that most have to stare at it for a few minutes...

I've even blown a picture up to 20x30 with a great result...
I have a 3.1 Kodak camera and am extremely pleased with it...
so much so I, when I wanted a vid. camera I went digital with that as well, Videos and Video editing have ALL new meaning now...
Easy as 1, 2, 3...

Craig
PS, Privacy is the same with a Digital as it is with a film based camera, the Digital is alittle better if you do home printing, but that doesn't get the Quality of commercial prints